Has HD radio already failed?

[700WLW]

Downloads can usually survive hiccups on the network with no ill effects. In streams, they manifest as dropouts.

Kind of like HD Radio and digital cell phones ?

 

[ElCheapo]

Let's say a company chooses to make available 8 or 10 of the most popular streaming internet stations and sources for duplication and distribution through their networked computers to their employees. This is commonly done today, without the bandwidth problems you mention. A single stream can be distributed to multiple locations, and users, on a computer network.

Companies are moving from old, slow, expensive, T-1 connections to better, more reliable, cheaper, much faster, high capacity fiber optic quickly. T-1 is old news.

Why all the deception?
It is your posts that "don't hold water".

You're living in a fantasy world - either that, or you've never spent a day in corporate America. You really think companies are going to build out the infrastructure just for their employees to listen to streaming audio? HA! Cite some sources!

Better yet - cite sources for your notion that companies are going to "make available 8 or 10 of the most popular streaming internet stations and sources for duplication and distribution through their networked computers to their employees."

Ok... Let me make sure I have this right - companies are not only going to beef up their networks so employees can goof off and listen to streaming audio (and what the heck - streaming video - we all know employees are more productive when they're spending hours at YouTube) they're ALSO going to hand pick streams to duplicate and bring into their offices? HAHAHAHA!

You've never met a corporate IT Nazi have you?

As for everyone making the jump to fiber, maybe someday but not today - especially not just so their employees can listen to streaming audio. One of the local cable companies is bringing fiber by our studios - they're trenching it this summer on the other side of the highway. They said it would cost between $3,000 and $4,000 just to get it into the building. We're going to pass for now.

The fact of the matter is - in most work environments T1 speeds do just fine - unless the employees start bogging the connection down with stuff like streaming audio. Many businesses don't even have a connection at that level - they're using DSL or cable modems.

I don't know where you work, but I'm 100% certain that no company I've ever worked for would build out their IT infrastructure just so their employees could be more entertained at work. Most working stiffs are incredibly lucky just to get a radio in their cubicle.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Streaming audio is just listening to audio while it is downloading. Done millions of times every hour. Why the deception?

Surely you don't even believe that...

Yes, streaming is listening to audio while it's downloading - unlike a regular download though, streaming depends on a constant and reliable stream of data. Downloads can usually survive hiccups on the network with no ill effects. In streams, they manifest as dropouts.

Unless digital streams use buffering, just as HD Radio digital streams buffer to reduce dropouts. Right?

 

[ElCheapo]

Unless digital streams use buffering, just as HD Radio digital streams buffer to reduce dropouts. Right?

I've yet to discover one that is buffered enough to work under all net conditions. In fact, about half of the ones I try here in my office drop out constantly. The link here is a T1.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Let's say a company chooses to make available 8 or 10 of the most popular streaming internet stations and sources for duplication and distribution through their networked computers to their employees. This is commonly done today, without the bandwidth problems you mention. A single stream can be distributed to multiple locations, and users, on a computer network.

Companies are moving from old, slow, expensive, T-1 connections to better, more reliable, cheaper, much faster, high capacity fiber optic quickly. T-1 is old news.

Why all the deception?
It is your posts that "don't hold water".

You're living in a fantasy world - either that, or you've never spent a day in corporate America. You really think companies are going to build out the infrastructure just for their employees to listen to streaming audio? HA! Cite some sources!

A-No, they will upgrade to fiber optic to reduce expenses, speed information transfer, and increase capacity of their networks.

Better yet - cite sources for your notion that companies are going to "make available 8 or 10 of the most popular streaming internet stations and sources for duplication and distribution through their networked computers to their employees."

A-Many already are.


Ok... Let me make sure I have this right - companies are not only going to beef up their networks so employees can goof off and listen to streaming audio (and what the heck - streaming video - we all know employees are more productive when they're spending hours at YouTube) they're ALSO going to hand pick streams to duplicate and bring into their offices? HAHAHAHA!

A-Glad you are so very easily amused and entertained.

You've never met a corporate IT Nazi have you?

A-Mostly HD Radio Nazi's.

As for everyone making the jump to fiber, maybe someday but not today - especially not just so their employees can listen to streaming audio. One of the local cable companies is bringing fiber by our studios - they're trenching it this summer on the other side of the highway. They said it would cost between $3,000 and $4,000 just to get it into the building. We're going to pass for now.

A-Low cost fiber optic connections are being built by many of the phone companies as fast as they can, to compete with cable and bring super high speed internet, hundreds of digital TV channels, and broadband business connections. Perhaps asking the wrong source, your cable operatator, and not your telephone company is your error.

The fact of the matter is - in most work environments T1 speeds do just fine - unless the employees start bogging the connection down with stuff like streaming audio. Many businesses don't even have a connection at that level - they're using DSL or cable modems.

A-And soon faster, more reliable, sometimes cheaper, fiber optic connections provided by their phone companies.

I don't know where you work, but I'm 100% certain that no company I've ever worked for would build out their IT infrastructure just so their employees could be more entertained at work. Most working stiffs are incredibly lucky just to get a radio in their cubicle.

A-I never said they would. Another of your manufactured, misleading, hypothetical assertions. Companies will switch to better, faster, more reliable, fiber optic connections to improve their business', and computer network infrastructures.

Many business', broadcasting stations, and even homes are already switching to fiber optic connections for their computer networks.

Here are a couple of somewhat outdated links:
http://www.bricklin.com/fiosinstall.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiber_to_the_premises
Phone companies such as Verizon are installing their FiOS for business and home as fast as they can:
http://www22.verizon.com/content/ConsumerFios/
http://www22.verizon.com/content/businessfios

 

[ElCheapo]

Let's say a company chooses to make available 8 or 10 of the most popular streaming internet stations and sources for duplication and distribution through their networked computers to their employees. This is commonly done today, without the bandwidth problems you mention. A single stream can be distributed to multiple locations, and users, on a computer network.

Companies are moving from old, slow, expensive, T-1 connections to better, more reliable, cheaper, much faster, high capacity fiber optic quickly. T-1 is old news.

Why all the deception?
It is your posts that "don't hold water".

You're living in a fantasy world - either that, or you've never spent a day in corporate America. You really think companies are going to build out the infrastructure just for their employees to listen to streaming audio? HA! Cite some sources!

A-No, they will upgrade to fiber optic to reduce expenses, speed information transfer, and increase capacity of their networks.

Better yet - cite sources for your notion that companies are going to "make available 8 or 10 of the most popular streaming internet stations and sources for duplication and distribution through their networked computers to their employees."

A-Many already are.


Ok... Let me make sure I have this right - companies are not only going to beef up their networks so employees can goof off and listen to streaming audio (and what the heck - streaming video - we all know employees are more productive when they're spending hours at YouTube) they're ALSO going to hand pick streams to duplicate and bring into their offices? HAHAHAHA!

A-Glad you are so very easily amused and entertained.

You've never met a corporate IT Nazi have you?

A-Mostly HD Radio Nazi's.

As for everyone making the jump to fiber, maybe someday but not today - especially not just so their employees can listen to streaming audio. One of the local cable companies is bringing fiber by our studios - they're trenching it this summer on the other side of the highway. They said it would cost between $3,000 and $4,000 just to get it into the building. We're going to pass for now.

A-Low cost fiber optic connections are being built by many of the phone companies as fast as they can, to compete with cable and bring super high speed internet, hundreds of digital TV channels, and broadband business connections. Perhaps asking the wrong source, your cable operatator, and not your telephone company is your error.

The fact of the matter is - in most work environments T1 speeds do just fine - unless the employees start bogging the connection down with stuff like streaming audio. Many businesses don't even have a connection at that level - they're using DSL or cable modems.

A-And soon faster, more reliable, sometimes cheaper, fiber optic connections provided by their phone companies.

I don't know where you work, but I'm 100% certain that no company I've ever worked for would build out their IT infrastructure just so their employees could be more entertained at work. Most working stiffs are incredibly lucky just to get a radio in their cubicle.

A-I never said they would. Another of your manufactured, misleading, hypothetical assertions. Companies will switch to better, faster, more reliable, fiber optic connections to improve their business', and computer network infrastructures.

Many business', broadcasting stations, and even homes are already switching to fiber optic connections for their computer networks.

Here are a couple of somewhat outdated links:
http://www.bricklin.com/fiosinstall.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiber_to_the_premises
Phone companies such as Verizon are installing their FiOS for business and home as fast as they can:
http://www22.verizon.com/content/ConsumerFios/
http://www22.verizon.com/content/businessfios

Most companies will switch only when and if it's cheaper.

Do you suppose the fiber ISPs will open up the full bandwidth potential for every subscriber, or do you think they might throttle it back and charge incrementally for speed and bandwidth?

You can bet on it.

Think companies will be paying extra just so their employees can listen to internet streams? Think again.

Of course, you don't like to think about realities like that when envisioning your streaming utopia with you as the president of some streaming network.

One question... Why are you so obsessed with HD Radio? It's never going to make it, right? Why do you spend so much time here bashing it rather than working for the betterment of your own medium?

It really makes me wonder - why does the HD Radio board contain far more threads about streaming than the streaming board?

After reading a few of the streamer's blogs, I have a theory. I'm just curious to see how accurate it is.

 

[700WLW]

Many business', broadcasting stations, and even homes are already switching to fiber optic connections for their computer networks.

Verizon, is in the process of laying fiber optic, for our neighborhood, because of complaints about phone call quality and calls dropping - Verizon offered to install it, for broadband for our house, but we declined.

 

[700WLW]

It really makes me wonder - why does the HD Radio board contain far more threads about streaming than the streaming board?

Personally, I am just interested in over-air HD Radio failing, and the more technologies that help it do so, the better.

 

[AMonFM]

There was once a time... way back.... when new technology was rolled out to meet some sort of a demand. Automatic transmissions & electric starters for cars, washing machines for the home, etc.

My question is: where was the consumer demand for digital radio? Oh sure, the technofiles will eat it up like they do with everything lableled 'new', but show me where the demand is for HD radio. Outside of reception complaints (nighttime AM, fringe FM problems), where was the public clammoring for better sounding FM radio? And as for the recption issues, HD can't fix those anyway, since if you're not close enough for analog, you won't get the HD either.

HD is simply an industry knee-jerk response to satellite delivered programming. As has been argued many times before, all we had to do is look to out neighbors to see that while they've had digital radio for quite some time, it has failed to take a hold in the public's hearts. Systems and recievers aside, I really don't feel the general public really cares enough about hearing the same programming in a new mode of delivery. XM and Sirius have the niche programming that terrestrial radio simply can't deliver (due to bandwidth, censorship, whatever..).

HD won't fail because of it's incompatability with analog. It's really a neat technology if you look at from an engineering standpoint. But after all the endless arguments I've read on here, nobody has been able to muster up any solid proof that the majority of the general public ever asked for HD. Without demand, the industry will need some type of 'wow' factor to bring interest. FM Stereo had it, Color TV had it, DSS even had it at first, but where or when is the industry going to point out the wow factor in HD? From the outside, it looks as if the new technology is simply being pushed on us regardless of if we need or want it, whereas technology used to meet a requirement or a desire. HD isn't flawed... the whole execution of it is.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Let's say a company chooses to make available 8 or 10 of the most popular streaming internet stations and sources for duplication and distribution through their networked computers to their employees. This is commonly done today, without the bandwidth problems you mention. A single stream can be distributed to multiple locations, and users, on a computer network.

Companies are moving from old, slow, expensive, T-1 connections to better, more reliable, cheaper, much faster, high capacity fiber optic quickly. T-1 is old news.

Why all the deception?
It is your posts that "don't hold water".

You're living in a fantasy world - either that, or you've never spent a day in corporate America. You really think companies are going to build out the infrastructure just for their employees to listen to streaming audio? HA! Cite some sources!

A-No, they will upgrade to fiber optic to reduce expenses, speed information transfer, and increase capacity of their networks.

Better yet - cite sources for your notion that companies are going to "make available 8 or 10 of the most popular streaming internet stations and sources for duplication and distribution through their networked computers to their employees."

A-Many already are.


Ok... Let me make sure I have this right - companies are not only going to beef up their networks so employees can goof off and listen to streaming audio (and what the heck - streaming video - we all know employees are more productive when they're spending hours at YouTube) they're ALSO going to hand pick streams to duplicate and bring into their offices? HAHAHAHA!

A-Glad you are so very easily amused and entertained.

You've never met a corporate IT Nazi have you?

A-Mostly HD Radio Nazi's.

As for everyone making the jump to fiber, maybe someday but not today - especially not just so their employees can listen to streaming audio. One of the local cable companies is bringing fiber by our studios - they're trenching it this summer on the other side of the highway. They said it would cost between $3,000 and $4,000 just to get it into the building. We're going to pass for now.

A-Low cost fiber optic connections are being built by many of the phone companies as fast as they can, to compete with cable and bring super high speed internet, hundreds of digital TV channels, and broadband business connections. Perhaps asking the wrong source, your cable operatator, and not your telephone company is your error.

The fact of the matter is - in most work environments T1 speeds do just fine - unless the employees start bogging the connection down with stuff like streaming audio. Many businesses don't even have a connection at that level - they're using DSL or cable modems.

A-And soon faster, more reliable, sometimes cheaper, fiber optic connections provided by their phone companies.

I don't know where you work, but I'm 100% certain that no company I've ever worked for would build out their IT infrastructure just so their employees could be more entertained at work. Most working stiffs are incredibly lucky just to get a radio in their cubicle.

A-I never said they would. Another of your manufactured, misleading, hypothetical assertions. Companies will switch to better, faster, more reliable, fiber optic connections to improve their business', and computer network infrastructures.

Many business', broadcasting stations, and even homes are already switching to fiber optic connections for their computer networks.

Here are a couple of somewhat outdated links:
http://www.bricklin.com/fiosinstall.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiber_to_the_premises
Phone companies such as Verizon are installing their FiOS for business and home as fast as they can:
http://www22.verizon.com/content/ConsumerFios/
http://www22.verizon.com/content/businessfios

Most companies will switch only when and if it's cheaper.

A-It usually is.

Do you suppose the fiber ISPs will open up the full bandwidth potential for every subscriber, or do you think they might throttle it back and charge incrementally for speed and bandwidth?

You can bet on it.

A-They do, and it is still cheaper and faster.

Think companies will be paying extra just so their employees can listen to internet streams? Think again.

A-No, but they are paying less, and geting the extra bandwidth of fiber optic as a bonus.

Of course, you don't like to think about realities like that when envisioning your streaming utopia with you as the president of some streaming network.

A-More of your fabricated, imaginary, assertive, argumentative, personal attacks.

One question... Why are you so obsessed with HD Radio? It's never going to make it, right? Why do you spend so much time here bashing it rather than working for the betterment of your own medium?

A-iBiquity/HD Radio is not my obsession, but the obsession of it's supporters. I prefer other High Definition digital audio delivery systems, and that is for the betterment of my own medium. A defective, interfering system such as iBiquity/HD Radio that jams the AM and FM bands is not in the best interest of broadcasting, listeners, or the public, just a small handful of special HD interests.

It really makes me wonder - why does the HD Radio board contain far more threads about streaming than the streaming board?

A-iBiquity/HD supporters invite rebuttle because of their continuous, unscrupulous, false claims and hype for a defective, problematic, interfering, transmission system.

After reading a few of the streamer's blogs, I have a theory. I'm just curious to see how accurate it is.

A-That's easy, you are 100% wrong, as usual.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Unless digital streams use buffering, just as HD Radio digital streams buffer to reduce dropouts. Right?

I've yet to discover one that is buffered enough to work under all net conditions. In fact, about half of the ones I try here in my office drop out constantly. The link here is a T1.

And overloaded, or defective and badly in need of upgrade to fiber optic.

 

[ElCheapo]

And overloaded, or defective and badly in need of upgrade to fiber optic.

No, I really don't think so. As the network administrator, I can tell you for certain the connection does just fine for every need that the company has. The problem with streaming is somewhere on the public internet.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

And overloaded, or defective and badly in need of upgrade to fiber optic.

No, I really don't think so. As the network administrator, I can tell you for certain the connection does just fine for every need that the company has. The problem with streaming is somewhere on the public internet.

No, perhaps your ISP's connection to the internet backbone is the problem. The internet, itself, is very rarely, if ever, that overloaded. There are many continuous digital audio steams on the net that have been running for years with better then 99.99% reliability. Virtually no stuttering, or downtime (as you claim is common). In fact reliability is much better then any other method of audio transmission. You are projecting your problems with your local connections to the internet at large. You need a new fiber optic connection more then most others who are not encountering all the problems you claim. Your problems are all local aberrations, most other internet users do not encounter. That is why you are getting so much resistance to your false claims.

 

[Chuck]

Streaming audio is just listening to audio while it is downloading. Done millions of times every hour. Why the deception?

Surely you don't even believe that...

Yes, streaming is listening to audio while it's downloading - unlike a regular download though, streaming depends on a constant and reliable stream of data. Downloads can usually survive hiccups on the network with no ill effects. In streams, they manifest as dropouts.

Usually, your player has enough buffering to make up for those temporary interruptions. I've been listening to Internet radio (my own station) for the hour or so I've squandered on this board. It hasn't dropped out all evening. It very seldom does.

I'm sitting in my living room with a wireless HP laptop that connects to a router that is connected to a wireless ISP. It sounds like a recipe for disaster, but it actually works quite well. And I live somewhere next to “the edge of the universe.”

 

[Mike Walker]

Actually "listening to audio while it downloads" is kind of the definition of streaming audio, but it doesn't mean it doesn't work well. With a broadband connection, and adequate bandwidth on the server end, it works quite reliably hour after hour. It may not be economically feasible for most stations to do on a very large scale (even big stations have only a tiny fraction of their over-the-air audience on their webcasts), but that doesn't mean it doesn't work well.

Longterm, however, webcasting is a bigger threat to terrestrial raido than satellite. MANY more people listen to internet radio than satellite. But satellite threatens those all-important in-car listeners. Yes I know guys..."in dash internet radios are just around the corner". Pardon me if I don't hold my breath (as I've grown fond of breathing, and the feeling of air in my lungs) ;D

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Actually "listening to audio while it downloads" is kind of the definition of streaming audio, but it doesn't mean it doesn't work well. With a broadband connection, and adequate bandwidth on the server end, it works quite reliably hour after hour. It may not be economically feasible for most stations to do on a very large scale (even big stations have only a tiny fraction of their over-the-air audience on their webcasts), but that doesn't mean it doesn't work well.

Longterm, however, webcasting is a bigger threat to terrestrial raido than satellite. MANY more people listen to internet radio than satellite. But satellite threatens those all-important in-car listeners. Yes I know guys..."in dash internet radios are just around the corner". Pardon me if I don't hold my breath (as I've grown fond of breathing, and the feeling of air in my lungs) ;D

Some smaller stations are reporting their internet streams as having more listeners then their 1,000 watt over the air listener projections.
Perhaps you are not aware of how popular internet based radio, in all it's forms, really is:
http://www.radio-info.com/smf/index.php/topic,57781.msg404082.html#msg404082
http://www.radio-info.com/smf/index.php/topic,58957.msg413338.html#msg413338

 

[Mike Walker]

I've been an internet broadcaster for 12 years, since EVERYBODY had dialup, and the sound was awful.

Perhaps YOU are not familiar with how much streaming to hundreds of thousands, or even millions would cost a BIG radio station in a major market! They'd turn the stream off pretty damn quickly if THEIR internet audience exceeded, or even equalled their over-the-air audience!

I am VERY pro internet radio, by the way. But anyone who says that having to pay PER LISTENER isn't a major financial hurdle just isn't paying attention! The two biggest obstacles to REALLY widespread acceptance of internet radio, where numbers challenge not just those of satellite (they already do), but terrestrial radio are available bandwidth, and streaming costs. Overcome those two, and another biggie smacks you upside the head...music licensing fees! They're based UPON THE NUMBER OF LISTENERS! The more people listen, the more it costs (OUCH!)

It's exactly the opposite (in all those respects) from traditional radio. Economy of scale makes it LESS expensive to serve more people. If these specific problems can be addressed, then it's "full speed ahead". Until then, while the total number of people listening to internet radio may be large, individual stations are usually serving dozens, hundreds, or (at most) thousands of listeners (dozens more like it. Check the number of listeners to a stream, including very popular ones like WOLF FM on shoutcast.com.

IP broadcasting in general holds much promise. Maybe some kind of ip solution will replace traditional radio eventually. But not until the above specific problems can be addressed.

I understand guys that you are internet radio listeners. But until you've been an actual "webcaster", you just don't understand how big, and expensive the hurdles are. :'(